The findings are consistent with the idea of a predominately liberal atmosphere on Twitter. Instead, it is linked to a pronounced shift towards higher approval of Hillary Clinton at the expense of Donald Trump, especially among independents, those who are most likely to be persuaded by social media content. Importantly, Twitter usage is not associated with a uniform shift away from Republican candidates. Similarly, Twitter likely affected voting decisions in swing counties more than in counties with a consistent streak of Republican or Democratic wins. In 2016, the effect was strongest on independent voters, with little evidence that those feeling strongly aligned with the Republican or Democratic party were persuaded. Survey data on individuals' voting decisions also suggest that Twitter usage has no significant effect on voters with strong Democratic or Republican views, but it can persuade centrist voters to stay away from more extreme candidates. Although voters had the choice to vote for Trump and other Republicans on the same day, Twitter only affected who they wanted for President." "On the other hand, we find no effect of Twitter on the 2016 House and Senate elections. "We estimate that doubling a county's number of Twitter users would have lowered the vote share of Trump by roughly 2 percentage points," Prof. Their conclusion is that Twitter disadvantaged Donald Trump, by making independent voters less likely to vote for him. A new study by Carlo Schwarz (Bocconi University) with Thomas Fujiwara and Karsten Müller (both Princeton University) casts doubt on this hypothesis by comparing electoral results in American counties with similar characteristics but differences in Twitter usage in the run-up to the 2016 presidential, House, and Senate elections.
0 kommentar(er)
